Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3648)	1/30/1998 11:52:00 AM
From: BlueCrab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

<<Public figures have no private lives, they know that when they run for public office.>> True, Betty, when they FIRST run. Then they get into the habit of getting elected, they love the public life but they also want the private one back. Gets awfully complex, no? Burnout is also prevalent among elected officials, as is hubris. Best case I can think of for term limits, although the argument that people should be able to vote for whomever they damn well please is, IMO, far more compelling...

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3648)	1/30/1998 12:11:00 PM
From: jhild	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20981

If you truly believe that then you are sure to be in for a lifetime of disappointment with your elected officials. I for one don't want to see a President elected on the basis of his celibacy. I care much more about policy. On the other hand if he chooses to make public indecency an issue, by doing it in the middle of the road, I wouldn't likely vote for him either, regardless of his policies. But that's not what we have here now is it? Monica didn't blow the whistle (so to speak). We have secretly taped conversations, about apparently concensual relationships, that have spilled over into a national dialogue. It seems to be driven by some with a "Get Clinton at any cost" attitude. I find that a far more dangerous threat to all of us. Stop worrying about his sex life. That's his business. The lieing, well, that's a bigger problem. Obstruction of justice, these are real concerns. But not his sex life. Absent any claim of harassment, that's his business. Btw, I take it that you probably didn't vote for Clinton. :^)

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (3648)	1/30/1998 12:13:00 PM
From: Frank	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

Betty betty betty, He did not ask for this for gawds sake! Its all these hanger oners looking for their fifteen minutes! So far, after all the bullshit, there is nothing conclusive on Clinton. God knows everyone and his brother has been trying to find SOMETHING that might stick! You seem to think politians should live in glass houses, so the public can watch and pass judgement, on their sex lives, how they eat soup or whatever! Pretty soon, people who want this scandal to be true will be obliged to open their eyes and see reality. There STILL is nothing to show his behaviour has been anything less than you suggest it should be. For balance, it would be nice to see equal slander pointed at those who would stoop to the crap we are witnessing. In my opinion they are nothing more than opportunists. I may be naive (sp) but if I didn't know better, I'd say it looks like the wheels are falling off the bandwagon. Wait till you see the ass covering and finger pointing going on now. Heads are going to roll, and it won't be ML's bobbing up and down. Frank One comment on reciprical sex thing. It is a fact, there are both men and women who's pleasure is recieved by giving pleasure. I don't think we should foist our ideals of good sex on someone else. Personally, my first thing would be to recipricate, if for some fluke I hadn't put her desires (not neccessarily what I think her desires should be) first, in the first place! <vbg>! Ok eveyone ....gimme yer best shot!!!!! ouch Betty, I can't help feel you will be very disappointed if the allegations prove baseless